> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ned > Freed > Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 8:08 AM > To: John C Klensin > Cc: Ned Freed; S Moonesamy; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [yam] Updating multipart/report > > This is one of the reasons why I prefer to see such restrictions lifted > in separate documents. Once the separate document (which can either be > one limited to removing the restriction or something more general) advances > the restriction can be removed from the original document without a > reset.
I'm concerned that this approach essentially leaves two versions of multipart/report around, because it's easy for someone to find the current RFC and not know about the other standards track document that updates it because it's not so noted on that RFC. My preference would be to obsolete the old one with the new one. I know that we update the RFC index with "updated by" information but people often don't know, or forget, to look there. But if people think this approach will really work, then I'm happy to shrink mine down to a paragraph or two that removes the restriction and briefly explains why. _______________________________________________ yam mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
